From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Peeples v. Ala. Power Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION
May 29, 2019
CIV. ACT. NO. 1:18-cv-525-TFM-MU (S.D. Ala. May. 29, 2019)

Opinion

CIV. ACT. NO. 1:18-cv-525-TFM-MU

05-29-2019

MARIO PEEPLES, Plaintiff, v. ALABAMA POWER COMPANY, Defendant.


ORDER

On April 30, 2019, the Magistrate Judge entered an amended report and recommendation which recommends this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and comply with the court's orders. See Doc. 6. No objections were filed.

FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b) authorizes dismissal of a complaint for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with a court order or the federal rules. Gratton v. Great Am. Commc'ns, 178 F.3d 1373, 1374 (11th Cir. 1999). Further, such a dismissal may be done on motion of the defendant or sua sponte as an inherent power of the court. Betty K Agencies, Ltd. v. M/V Monada, 432 F.3d 1333, 1337 (11th Cir. 2005). "[D]ismissal upon disregard of an order, especially where the litigant has been forewarned, generally is not an abuse of discretion." Vil, 715 F. App'x at 915 (quoting Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir. 1989)). "[E]ven a non-lawyer should realize the peril to [his] case, when [he] . . . ignores numerous notices" and fails to comply with court orders. Anthony v. Marion Cty. Gen. Hosp., 617 F.2d 1164, 1169 (5th Cir. 1980); see also Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir. 1989) (As a general rule, where a litigant has been forewarned, dismissal for failure to obey a court order is not an abuse of discretion.). Therefore, the Court finds it appropriate to exercise its "inherent power" to "dismiss [Plaintiff's claims] sua sponte for lack of prosecution." Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630, 82 S. Ct. 1386, 8 L. Ed. 2d 734 (1962); see also Betty K Agencies, Ltd. v. M/V Monada, 432 F.3d 1333, 1337 (11th Cir. 2005) (describing the judicial power to dismiss sua sponte for failure to comply with court orders).

Plaintiff has taken no action since the filing of his complaint in December 2018. Despite several attempts to contact him requesting updated contact information, Plaintiff failed to respond. Accordingly, the Amended Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED and this action is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice.

DONE and ORDERED this the 29th day of May 2019.

/s/Terry F. Moorer

TERRY F. MOORER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Peeples v. Ala. Power Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION
May 29, 2019
CIV. ACT. NO. 1:18-cv-525-TFM-MU (S.D. Ala. May. 29, 2019)
Case details for

Peeples v. Ala. Power Co.

Case Details

Full title:MARIO PEEPLES, Plaintiff, v. ALABAMA POWER COMPANY, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: May 29, 2019

Citations

CIV. ACT. NO. 1:18-cv-525-TFM-MU (S.D. Ala. May. 29, 2019)